Persuasion 101: Watch the tense, practice decorum.

Here’s another question, this time from AP English Language student Will Sims.

We are learning about these rhetorical skills and tools, so how do you begin using them in real life? Once you do start using them how do you know you are using the skills correctly and not creating more fallacies yourself?

The beautiful thing about rhetoric (and the ugly thing as well) is that there is no “correct” way to use the tools. If you achieve your persuasion goal, then you’ve used rhetoric perfectly. Fallacious logic often persuades people. That qualifies an effective fallacy as “correct” rhetoric. (One motive for writing Thank You for Arguing, other than the fact my wife told me to, was my desire to inoculate people against rhetoric’s more evil manipulation.)

When it comes to which tools to use in real life, I’d start with the ones that calm things down when emotions get uncomfortable. My favorite two tools on those occasions:

1. Watch the tense, and try to change it.

Aristotle himself made this point, and it’s brilliant.

The past tense often gets used for failures and crimes. (“Look what you did!” “Who used up all the toothpaste?”) Aristotle called past-tense rhetoric “forensic,” because it has to do with crime and punishment—forensics. It can be useful for investigating a problem, but this rhetoric rarely actually solves problems. “Who used up all the toothpaste” investigated the toothpaste crime, but it didn’t get my son to bring me a tube.

The present tense has to do with values, tribes, and identities. (“A good son wouldn’t use up the toothpaste!” “Americans who don’t believe what I believe are traitors!”) This rhetoric—Aristotle called it “demonstrative,” because competitive speechmaking in ancient Greece often had to do with what’s good or bad—makes for the best sermons. In fact, just about all the greatest political speeches use the present tense in their best lines.

To solve problems, make common choices, and get people excited about a needed action, you want the future tense. Aristotle called this rhetoric “deliberative,” because it has to do with deliberating decisions that affect the future. (“How are we going to keep this from happening again?”) When an argument uses blame (past tense) or calls names (present tense), try pivoting to the future tense. (“Let’s talk about what we should do.”)

2. Practice decorum.

Remember when I made everybody uncomfortable by telling the class I was sending love beams out of my eyes? True decorum isn’t just about convincing an audience you’re part of the same tribe. It starts with convincing yourself that you have a lot in common, and that they’re worthy of your love. This gets especially challenging when the annoyingly opinionated uncle shows up at Thanksgiving. It’s hard to send the guy love beams while he’s pontificating and everybody around the table is staring down at their turkey. Your job is to love that uncle, even honor him. Think of what you have in common, and speak to it. Most of all, be the grownup in the room. Personally, I wish the world’s religions focused more on this aspect of decorum: love first, think of differences later. It can move rhetorical mountains.

That’s it. Practice tenses and love. Learn to spot fallacies—it makes for great brain training—but don’t obsess over them. You’re on your way to mastering the art of leadership.

Get yourself some powerful tools. Subscribe here.

How can you practice the tools of persuasion?

In the many rhetoric video chats I hold with students—as many as four or five a week—I often get this question. Gabriel Davis, who studies at the Little Rock Christian Academy, asked it perfectly in a follow-up email:

My question is, what practices can I use to get better at using rhetoric and at arguing? Right now I'm really slow to think about which technique to use. So how can I get better?

Hi, Gabriel,

I often get asked which tools to pull out when things get uncomfortable or when you have a sudden need to get your point across. The answer: Don’t try. Not yet, anyway. I wrote Thank You for Arguing in the hope that it would help spark in the reader a rhetorical habit of mind, a way of seeing (or hearing!) the world as a rhetorician. That means starting with the most important tool of all: your ears.

1. Try to listen for what people want, what they seem to believe, and the impression they’re trying to make on others. Listen to what marketers, politicians, and influencers are saying online. What specific audiences or tribes are they speaking to? What beliefs are they assuming? Are their words and images mostly ethical, speaking to values and identities? Pathetic, playing on or changing emotions? Or logical, employing facts or fallacies?

2. When you’re in a conversation, don’t feel you have to argue. Just ask questions—ask for facts. Ask if those facts have to do with a trend. Ask where the speaker got the facts. Decide whether those facts really do lead to the speaker’s conclusion. Instead of offering an opposing view, critique the argument itself. “This is really interesting, but I’m not sure you’ve convinced me yet.” When forced to improve their argument, people tend to modify their opinion, making it less extreme. You’ve moved the needle rhetorically, without actually seeming to argue. That counts as a win in my book.

3. Then there’s how you project yourself, creating a first-rate ethos. Always try to be the grownup in the room, keeping a cool head, listening well. If someone wants your opinion, think of the two wisest words in rhetoric: “That depends.” The secret to a great phronesis—the impression you give that you’re a great problem solver—is to understand that every situation is different. Remember your classmate’s question about the car? Her parents had given her little sister a brand-new one, while she was stuck commuting to college in an older car. My first thought was, “That depends on how old that car is.” When she told me that it was a 2012 model, I saw a potential logical argument: a car that old can cost more for annual repairs than a lease might be. (Keep in mind that I’m a terrible mechanic and drive a 2012 truck myself. “That depends” made me sound like I knew what I was talking about.)

All this boils down to one thing: everything is rhetorical.

Birds sing figures of speech (patterns of sounds) to attract mates and find territory. The clothes we wear make a statement, whether we mean to or not.

Everybody wants something. This parent wants her child’s safety. This teenager wants independence. This dark-skinned woman wants respect. This elder book author wants young people to learn rhetoric and restore the rhetoric-centered, classical values that shaped our civilization (or is he just trying to sell books?).

Everyone believes in a set of “truths” and values. Even in our deeply divided culture, we have many values in common.

By listening for those common beliefs and values, desires and arguments, you’ll fulfill your potential as a leader. Keep practicing, and go save the world.

Best,

Jay

Exercise your mind! Subscribe to this blog.

The dark art of framing

What does it mean to “frame” an issue? Is it like framing a picture of your sweet grandmother, the one where she’s smoking her favorite pipe?

Yeah, kind of. To frame an issue means to put it in your own box, setting up the terms and context in a way that favors you. (To get the details about framing, see chapter 12 of Thank You for Arguing, fourth edition.)

The most important tool of framing is redefinition, in which you redefine the terms of the argument. The tobacco industry did this neatly back in the 1970s, when it talked about the “controversy” over the health hazards of smoking. Scientists and doctors saw no controversy at all. Smoking is terrible for you, period. But the word “controversy” framed the smoking issue by sowing doubt. And guess what framing word climate change deniers are using these days? Yep. “Controversy.”

Here’s a video that uses framing to answer a question from a high school student. Tell us what you think in the comments.

Don’t call it subscribing. Call it spying on Jay’s deepest thoughts.

We suppose "La Slurpe" was taken.

Only the French could look at galoshes and think of amour.

For centuries the French have been kissing without talking, but now they have to get all, like, oral. The new Petit Robert dictionary (pronounced, sexily, “petty robare”) contains the verb galocher, meaning “to kiss with tongues.”

The term comes from la galoche, an ice skating boot. Only the French could look at galoshes and think of sex. But apparently they were thinking about skating as well—you know, gliding tongues and all that.

Philosophers of language say that all words are analogies, templates that connect us to reality. To a linguist, a kiss isn’t just a kiss. It’s also a figures competition.

Try this dialogue with someone who attracts you.

You: Voulez-vous galocher avec moi?

Attractive Other: Gallows what?

You: Galocher. It means kissing with tongues skating in galoshes.

If the A.O. is a word geek, the result will be an entirely hygienic conversation. A win for rhetoric and for public health!

Click here to subscribe.

The one in which I answer a bunch of Qs

To subscribe to these posts, click here.

I did a 7:15 a.m. video chat with AP Language students at Colegio Nuevo Grenada in Bogota, Colombia. The connection got too shaky; I could hear the students, but they couldn’t hear me. So I resorted to messaging, typing furiously. The session produced an unexpected benefit: a transcript, which I’ve edited slightly. (Each “Q” is a question asked by an individual student. “J”: c’est moi.)

Q: How can you remember all those tools of rhetoric in an argument? And how do you know which ones to use?

J: I know how you feel. The best thing is not to remember every single tool. Just remember one thing at a time. It’s like learning a sport. The first tool to remember: Set your goal. What do you want out of the argument? To sustain a relationship? To talk someone into something? The second tool: Stick to talking about the future. That’s where problems and differences get resolved.

Q: What’s the best rhetoric to use in a college admissions essay?

J: Go to ArgueLab.com and see my video about how to write a college essay. The biggest advice I give: Tell a story. Most college recruiters are really bored from all those thousands of essays they have to read. So give them a good yarn. And no grandmothers!!!! Everybody exploits his grandmother.

Q: Can you talk more about multiple yoking, or the play-by-play technique?

J: Sports announcers use this figure (technically called diazeugma) as they describe the action. You can use it when you’re telling a story. The best stories and jokes get told in the present tense. And that’s what the play-by-play technique does.

Q: Can you give an example?

A: Rhetoric Boy starts typing…the whole world holds its breath….Will they change their lives with his wisdom, or does he just look like an idiot? He keeps typing…people keep reading… and so on. I think I need more coffee.

Q: Can you talk a bit about ornament?

J: Ornament is a catch-all term.  It stands for anything other than just plain old boring language. Any figure of speech counts as an ornament. Have you studied figures?

Q: Yes. Can you give us an example of using it in real life?

J: Sure! Politicians use it all the time to sound biblical. “And I will lower taxes. And I will put a chicken in every pot. And I will give free medical care. And I will allow people to marry anybody they want. And I will allow them not to.” See what that is? Beginning every sentence with “and?”

[Class: Anaphora.]

J: Anaphora!!! Right!! Smart class.

Q: How can you use decorum if you don’t know your audience?

J: Decorum: the art of fitting in. It’s hard to fit in if you don’t know what you’re fitting into. This happens a lot when you write for an audience online. It can go haywire, right? That’s why it’s important not to get angry or snarky in an email. It can go places you never intended. So… The best kind of decorum for an unknown audience is “semi-formal” speech. Like the kind I used in writing the book. Speak as though you’re talking on television to a general audience. And write the same way—as if you’re speaking on TV. Make sense?

Q: What do you do when you’re arguing with someone and they point out a fallacy you committed?

J: Never point out someone else’s fallacy. But if they point out yours… It’s good to praise the other person. “Great catch! I learn so much from you! So tell me: How would you have made my point?” Now you get the person actually telling YOUR point of view. Making YOUR argument. It does great things…like messing up their head. Isn’t this great manipulation???

Q: Why is it so important to choose the right medium?

J: Never ask a person to marry you by email. And never break up with them by email. See the mistake? Email is writing. It lacks the emotional and personal qualities. When a guy proposes to a woman by Jumbotron, that embarrasses the woman. She would be crazy to say yes.

In Thank You for Arguing, I list various media—instant messaging, telephoning, speechmaking, etc.—and link each to the various senses: sight, sound, smell, touch. Touch conveys the most emotion. Sight conveys character. The sound of a voice? Logic. And character.

Q: Can you explain the difference between metonymy and synecdoche?

J: That’s a tough one. Linguists argue about this all the time. That’s why I like to combine the two into what I call the “belonging trope.” Both metonymy and synecdoche take something that belongs and makes it stand for the whole thing. If I say, “Want a toot?”, I mean, “Do you want a drink from this bottle? Toot imitates the act of drinking from a bottle. That’s a metonymy. But you can call it a belonging trope. Synecdoche takes a member of a group, or a piece of something and makes it represent the whole. Like “redhead.” It stands for a person, but you’re just talking about the head. Or “White House,” standing for the entire US administration.

Q: What techniques should you use to sell somebody something.

J: There are lots of ways to get someone to buy something. One tool: repeat what the other person says. Keep repeating what they say, while nodding your head. It shows you’re with them in this together. Let them talk more than you do. Then steer the conversation around to a problem—THEIR problem—and show how what you’re selling solves it. The idea is to connect what you’re selling to the person’s own need.

Biggest sales mistake: Talking about how you’d benefit. The point is to make the person feel there’s a deep need. And you’re the one to fill it!!! Works in love as well as sales. So I need to sell you something. I’ve noticed that you all are really interested in figures and tropes. Right? I’m glad you’re interested. Figures and tropes are critical to your education. (OK, so it’s best if I let you do the talking, but I’ll keep going) There is a book that solves the problem. I happen to have written it. It’s called Word Hero. OK, so here’s another technique. Don’t ask for too much. Ask for a little baby step.

Q: How do you twist a cliché?

J: Twisting a cliché takes a LOT of practice. So…want to give me a cliche?

A: “With power comes great responsibility.”

J: The Batman cliche!

[Class:] Spiderman!

J: Spiderman cliche!! With great typing comes…Great typos. It works in making you look clever. Without trying very hard.

Q: Which works better in day to day persuasion, inductive or deductive logic?

J: That’s a brilliant Q. Deductive logic is more…logical. It’s great in formal argument, such as in a paper. But in regular speech, inductive argument works better. That’s because stories work better than mere facts in persuasion. And induction has to do with stories. Examples, that is, in the form of stories. So if you talk in anecdotes, people see them as a kind of truth. Even if those anecdotes are made up, or just support your point of view. Sherlock is all about deduction, right? And he’s really, really annoying. Unpersuasive. So… deduction for formal stuff… and induction for informal, regular persuasion. Make sense?

Q: What’s the best way to begin an argument?

A: The biggest thing to think about is your ethos. Establish your character, or image, with the other person. Do that by (a) showing you care about the other person. (b) Show you know what you’re talking about. And (c): Show you share the same values. I call these traits “Caring, Craft, and Cause.” They get the other person to like and trust you—the most powerful tool of all. Start by asking questions of the other person. Show you sympathize and are familiar with their problem. Finally, talk about some higher cause. “This isn’t about whether I should wear high heels. This is about empowering women!”

Q: Thank you!

A: You’re welcome.

Want to become a great speaker? Be someone else.

It’s a technique called prosopopoeia (pro-so-PO-pee-ah). Every teacher of speech and rhetoric should use it in class. Why? For one thing, every rhetoric class used to consider this exercise essential to oratory. For another, it really works.

Prosopopeia has students pretending to be great speakers from the present and past. You try to imitate the character and voice of a famous person, often in a novel setting. For example, have James Madison lecture the current Supreme Court on the Constitution. Or have different women in history argue why they should be on the $10 bill.

The more dramatic students really get into it. But even shy students can benefit, pretending to be someone else for a while. Besides being a fun speech exercise, it’s a terrific way to teach history—by channeling it.

Here’s a video we did for ArgueLab. Yes, I pronounce “prosopopoeia” wrong. But my kids say I do a brilliant Maggie Thatcher.

Want to get emails of these posts? Subscribe here.